When comparing the communist nation of China with the democratic nation of Australia many differences are apparent. The application of the legislative (law making and modifying function), executive (administrative function) and judiciary (law enforcing and dispute resolving function) is vastly different between the two nations as can see when we compare and contrast the underlying principles of each system of government. Firstly, both nations claim to uphold the concept of the rule of law, although due to corruptive forces surrounding the Chinese court system, this concept is often thwarted and equality before the law is not upheld. Within the constitutions of both nations the basic principles of separation of powers have been applied;
…show more content…
However the constitution of China has failed to uphold the concept of Separation of Power in many ways. Examples include Article 62(4) which gives the NPC the power to “elect the President and the Vice-President of the People's Republic of China”, Article 62(7) “elect the President of the Supreme People's Court” and Article 63 which provides the NPC with the power to “recall or remove from power” the President and the Vice-President of the People's Republic of China and the President of the Supreme Court as well as many more. The tight hold the legislative function has over the other two branches is thus accountable for China’s failure to uphold the principle of Separation of powers.
Greek Philosopher Aristotle said more than two thousand years ago, "The rule of law is better than that of any individual." Although there is no explicit recognition of the rule of law in the Australian Constitution, in Australian Communist Party (1951), Dixon J of the High Court of Australia recognised that the rule of law forms an unwritten 'assumption' underpinning the Australian Constitution. Thus Australian’s legal system is based on